The Geopolitics of Ethnopolitics:
The New Concept of “Eurosiberia”
Translated by Greg Johnson
Presented at the International Conference on “The Future of the White World,” Moscow, June 8th–10th, 2006
This text is dedicated to my friend and relentless critic, master of creative ideas, Professor Anatoly Ivanov.
I am very happy to speak again before my dear Russian friends, during this conference whose goal is to reflect on the fundamental ethnic and historical solidarity that henceforth must link all peoples of European origins in the 21st century.
We are entering a world in which the very old historical and national rivalries between all our peoples must be dialectically surpassed and replaced by a global unity. For we will face common threats of immense magnitude against our identity and our survival. This necessity constitutes a historical metamorphosis.
My talk will define the nature of these grave threats; explain the central role which Russia could play in this new alliance of all peoples of European origin; clarify the new concept of Eurosiberia—the union of peninsular Europe and Russia—and of ethnopolitics, i.e., the radical modification of world geopolitics by the introduction of the ethnic dimension; then, based on a risky but perhaps relevant forecast, I will propose the idea of the Septentrion, which is perhaps a revolutionary extension of the ideas I have expressed. Finally, I will conclude with the major historical role Russia will have to play in this process.
The French Revolution and its consequence, the Soviet Revolution, are only minor historical episodes compared to what awaits us. These two “revolutions” pose only secondary problems. Today, we must face the crucial questions, which condition our survival as people of European origin. For millennia, we have not faced a “state of emergency” (the Ernstfall of the political theorist Carl Schmitt) so tragic.
All peoples of European origin are in constant demographic retreat. For the first time in our long history, we are being invaded by massive and uncontrolled immigration from other continents, and we are not reproducing ourselves. This immigration, which is connected with a true replacement of our population, is also the third and most severe attempt of Islam to conquer the European continent. This reinforces the opinion I expressed in one of my books, L’Archéofuturisme, that the 21st century may well be that of the “shock of the past,” of a challenge rising again from depths of history and memory, far removed from the phantasms of “modernity” in its communist or liberal versions. It is the return of the “eternal present” of which Nietzsche spoke, i.e., of the invariance of human history, of the clash of civilizations, imperfectly anticipated in the United States by Samuel Huntington and more pertinently explained in France by Professor Pierre Vial, a historian present at this conference.
I suggest that this clash of civilizations actually amounts to the confrontation of the white race with all the others. If nothing changes, in the middle of the 21st century, i.e., in a generation, peoples of European descent will be minorities in their own lands, on our continent and even in America. This tragic upheaval had been implicitly envisaged by Oswald Spengler in the 1920s (The Decline of the West) and by Pierre Chaunu and Jean Raspail in the 1970s (The White Plague and The Camp of the Saints). The diagnosis for our civilization and our ethnosphere is death, pure and simple, if no unforeseen doctor emerges to cure us.
René Descartes, following Aristotle, distinguished the causes of any phenomenon into secondary (or superficial, immediate) causes and primary (or fundamental) causes. The cause of this triple phenomenon of demographic decline, migratory invasion, and the massive ascendency of Islam must be sought in exogenous or primary and endogenous or secondary sources.
Among the first: an enormous rush towards the North of all the peoples of the South, fascinated by the (false) the Western Eldorado, and suffering from their own inability to govern themselves; after decolonization, they seek by immigration to return to the bosom of the “Whites.” But, at the same time, to take revenge. Political psychoanalysis can easily explain such schizophrenia, as does Hegel’s master-slave dialectic.
The endogenous and thus primary causes of this evil are internal spiritual pathologies of European peoples: ethnomasochism (hatred of oneself) and xenophilia (love of the foreign) which lead to cynical or naive collaboration with the enemy, mercantile materialism and unbridled individualism, egalitarianism, the inversion of values, the loss of memory of traditions as well as the future, emasculation and confusion of sexual roles, moral melancholy and morbidity dissimulated under a factitious and simulated optimism, loss of the aesthetic sense, etc.
Are the European peoples undergoing an irremediable ageing, a biological loss of substance and will to live, predicted by Oswald Spengler and Paul Valéry, where the beginning of the “Iron Age,” the Kali Yuga of Hindu tradition, is a prelude to death? It is a disturbing portent: in Europe, neo-totalitarian legislation represses all those who wish to resist and encourage all that is morbid and decadent. It is this “false freedom” that makes our youth spineless.
I agree with Professor Anatoly Ivanov and Louis Rougier, as well as with Nietzsche, that one of the causes of this pathology is the “viral” influence of secularized Christian morals, based on universal charity, egalitarian cosmopolitanism, a culture of repentance, shame of oneself and sin, as well as a delirious, unrealistic conception of “love.” This thesis deserves debate, but it is quite relevant.
However, one does not have to yield to absolute pessimism. The European people are metamorphic, i.e., in the long run, they can be regenerated. But rebirth will be able to take place only through a “positive Utopia,” i.e., the imagination of another world that completely breaks with this one. The tragic events that prepare Europe and all humanity for what I call the “convergence of catastrophes” allow us to envision something new, unthinkable today, but conceivable tomorrow. When chaos carries out the tragic task of cleansing.
Allow me to summarize some of my positions here: it is necessary to envision an ethnocentric and autocentric Eurosiberia, i.e. an alliance of the whole of peninsular and Central Europe with Russia, from the tip of Brittany to the Bering Strait. The goal is the formation of a federated Empire that is ethnically homogeneous and economically independent, autarkical. In this spirit, Russia would be in the center of such an ensemble, which would be most powerful and most imposing on the planet. This idea is obviously opposed to that of “Eurasia,” which neglects the ethnic unity of greater Europe and regards the Russians as Asians, which they are not.
Eurosiberia must be founded on the principle of the “separation of peoples.” Each one in its place, and in good relations with its neighbors, if possible. The economic model, which breaks completely with today’s “globalization” and planetary free trade, follows the principle that each civilizational realm must be self-sufficient. It is the economic theory of the autarky of great spaces that I developed following the work of the German Historical School and of Maurice Allais, a “third way” that simultaneously rejects the old obsolete capitalist and Marxist paradigms. To each group of peoples its own economic, political, and ethnic model.
Concerning the United States, my thesis is simple and shocking to many Manicheans. We should be neither anti-American, nor pro-American, but for ourselves. It is quite obvious and natural that Washington will seek to prevent by any means the birth of a “Eurosiberia,” which would be its nightmare. To encircle and weaken Russia, to break the threatening Paris-Berlin-Moscow axis, to awkwardly toy with Islam which has turned against them: all is fair for the American leaders whose backs are against the wall and, moreover, desperate for oil. I can only approve of Vladimir Putin’s efforts to thwart these attempts to surround Russia and to restore, after a fashion, Russian power.
Yet I think obsessive anti-Americanism is a trap. One should not confuse the Washington regime with the ethnic and popular core of America. My position is inspired here by a certain Niccolò Machiavelli. Moreover, I know the United States well: it includes forces that are completely in favor of an alliance with a future Eurosiberia.
This formula has stirred controversy in France, but I stand by it: it is unproductive to regard America as an absolute enemy, because it is only a provisional adversary. On the other hand, I ask: What if, whether we like it or not, the principal enemy is the Third World under the banner of Islam?
Of course Eurosiberia will shock globalists and right-thinking people, like the petty nationalists, who are still in the 19th century. All these ideas obviously constitute a radical rupture with the current world (which is already passé) but seem to me in agreement with the earthquakes, the upheavals, the storms that appear already on the horizon, with the total historical metamorphosis that we will live through in less than one generation.
I would like to insist on two new concepts: first of all, that of ethnopolitics. “Geopolitics” took into account only geographical factors. But the new planet taking shape before us will be one of blocs of nations and civilizations fighting one another for survival, and not a world of human harmony, a “world state” ruling a mongrelized humanity, an infantile extension of the American “melting pot,” with petty rivalries between states.
Later on, it will be necessary for Eurosiberia to consider allying itself with all white people of European origin in 21st century, whether they live on the American continent or elsewhere. This is the concept of Septentrion.
Perhaps this position is utopian? Perhaps it is visionary? Isn’t this planetary solidarity of all the peoples of European origin, sometimes transnational, a new concept, worthy of discussion?
The Destiny and Responsibility of Russia
I insisted that this conference take place in Russia, because I think that the Russian soul and the Russian people are one of the major centers of European civilization. Those who claim that Russia is “Asian” mislead. Those who proclaim that Russia is “Western” mislead too. Russia is European, I would even say “supra-European.” Its strange destiny is to gather all the heritages. I think that it is in Russia that the European peoples will be able to gather and defend their identity. Without Russia, its people, its space, its resources, its genius, nothing is possible. I know very well that Russia is sick, but no sicker than the rest of us, the Europeans of the West. And it is only together that we will be healed.
Russia is located at the geopolitical and ethnopolitical center of a gigantic “Eurosiberian” space stretching from the Atlantic to the Pacific and including the Russian Federation, Central Europe, and peninsular Western Europe. In terms of resources, this space has no rival in the world. It does not need anyone. It will have to aim at increasing its ethnic homogeneity, protecting its borders, finding its related cultural roots, its common historical memory, increasing its birthrate, ensuring its power, a tranquil, wise, just and invincible power, inspired by certain principles formulated by Plato in his Republic. I am reminded of the formula of the Belgian theorist Robert Steuckers, founder of Euro-Synergies, who characterized the Euro-Russian alliance—and thus Eurosiberia—as a “giant hedgehog,” who touches no one and is touched by no one.
This is why Russia must be more concerned with reinforcing its links to its European neighbors to the West than with the Middle East and the Asian Far East. Likewise, our task in Western Europe is to explain that the union with Russia is a top priority.
But how to define Eurosiberia? It is impossible to specify institutional contours today. Like any great historical project, it always begins with the mobilizing dream of some conscious minority. It will obviously be an immense Confederation, or a racially homogeneous Empire (unlike those that preceded it) on which the sun never sets. It requires a break with the narrow egoistic and suicidal logic of the “nation states” that have divided the European people, perhaps taking as a starting point the Breton European federalism, of which one of the theorists, Mr. Yann-Ber Tillenon, is present at this conference.
This Eurosiberian project is based on an inversion of values (Umwertung): the Anglo-Saxon world, the West, the United States will cease to control the ethnic, political, and economic destiny of whites, replaced by the Eurosiberian bloc, stretching “from the moors to the steppes, from the fjords to the maquis.” It is around Eurosiberia, around the European motherland, that the brother peoples will have to gather, including those of North America and elsewhere. Allow me to quote my late friend, the great painter and poet Olivier Carré: “We turn towards the rising sun. We are the New World.”
How can these ideas be put into practice? I don’t know. But I know what is essential: to communicate them, to make them known. “Revolutions in the heart” found “revolutions in reality.” One thing is sure: Russia, your dear Russia, our dear Russia is at the center of this historical destiny. We have a common and glorious history. We fought one another well. But it is time to set aside childish things. We must come together again, reunite around our common ancestral stock, because we have common enemies and we belong to fundamentally the same people. We are brothers on the same land.
Is Nicki Minaj Super Bass-ed?
Le Nationalisme Blanc est-il haineux ?
Qu’est-ce que le nationalisme américain ?
Le Nationalisme Blanc est-il non-américain ?
Introduction to Yockey’s The Enemy of Europe
Fondations du XXIème siècle: Le Siècle de 1914 de Dominique Venner
From the Mountains of Kandahar
نظرة في الثمانينيات على اللوبي الإسرائيلي